1) The age of the earth is almost always ascertained by methods which rely on unproven and tenuous assumptions. For instance, for radiometric dating results to be accurate, the sample must have remained in a closed system so that the mother and daughter isotopes could not have been affected. This is unlikely.
2) The methods used to achieve various dates contradict each other. Helium dating methods contradict Potassium/Argon dating methods, etc. This means that one or both methods is unreliable.
There are many more reasons to reject the age of the earth provided by poor dating methods. Are there any reasons to accept the young-earth view, however? I think there are a few. My personal favorite is that DNA and organic matter has been recovered from dinosaur bones and other fossils generally dated to be millions of years old. Why is this significant? Because organic matter like this couldn’t survive past 20,000 years of age. It’s just not possible.
Ultimately, I accept creation and a young earth because Christ did. Since He rose from the dead, I trust what He had to say about the matter.
Abortion as murder is a much easier one.
- There is no morally significant difference between a fetus and a newborn.
- It is murder to kill a newborn.
- It is murder to kill a fetus.
The only differences between a fetus and a newborn can be categorized as differences in size, level of development, environment, and dependency. None of these differences make you more or less of a human person. As such, the first premise stands.
I won’t defend the second premise, as I feel almost everyone would be in agreement with it. If you’re not, you have some problems, the primary one being when is it permissible to kill an infant?
And so my stances are justified.
- @johnnyis
Someone asked me to make this rebloggable, and I didn’t, but this kind soul did! Hurrah!
(Source: jeremylandicho)



